Geek Answers Handbook

GZip compression costs with AMF

We have a Flex / Java application using BlazeDS, and we are studying the reduction in the size of the data transferred between our server and client.

Since AMF is a binary format and is considered quite compact, is there any benefit from enabling GZip compression? Has anyone else done this before and have you seen any significant benefits of using compression?

UPDATE

I just ran a simple test to determine what compression ratios we could expect if we enabled gzipping. I just grabbed the AMF payload in some files and simply sealed them using the Linux command line version. I did not specify the compression level, just the default, that is, "normal". It appears that the average payload size is decreasing by 9%, with some payloads reaching 61%. Can anyone see the flaw in this method and what compression level can be used in HTTP gzipping?

+5
source share
3 answers

- SOAP AMF, . , . , ( xfire + aegis SOAP BlazeDS AMF):

  • SOAP: : 1000 gzipped: 100 ( 90%)
  • AMF: : 200 gzipped: 30 ( 85%)

- gzipping, , . AMF , XML (SOAP). , , .

+5

. , . .

. , 6 , 32-, GUID, 3 . .

.

AMF , . . .

.

+4

, GZIP , RIA Benchmark. , , . - .

Also keep in mind that GZIP has overhead on both sides, so sometimes it's overhead (slower connections), and sometimes not.

+2
source

More articles:


All Articles